Neons Frustration Station

this is a vent blog

[neonsfrustrationstation]

huge shout out to trans people who feel like they need to be skinny to be accepted as their gender.

you're your gender no matter what anyone says or what your body looks like.

you deserve to eat and you need nutrition to stay alive despite the horrors. and you need to stay alive because the world needs you

[neonsfrustrationstation]

You deserve to eat even if you have a double chin.

You deserve to eat even if you have love handles.

You deserve to eat even if you see changes in your body after

[neonsfrustrationstation]

even if your partner tells you you're getting fat.

even if your parents think you're too big.

even if teachers or classmates comment on your weight.

You deserve to be fed and I Iove you

[neonsfrustrationstation]

You deserve to eat even if you have a double chin.

You deserve to eat even if you have love handles.

You deserve to eat even if you see changes in your body after

[neonsfrustrationstation]

I've had a few people follow me from pro ana blogs so I'm here to tell you:

it's okay to eat. being fat is not a bad thing. I am so sorry the world lies to you and that you're I feel like you only have worth if you're skinny. It's not true. you are worthy. you are deserving of nutrition. Yes, even if you're fat. If you're anorexic and fat while reading this, just know, I love you, I love you, I love you.

[echosblanketfort]

If you hate your body, remember that you're being sold your own hate and it's fully so that you'll spend money to "fix" yourself

[neonsfrustrationstation]

I've had a few people follow me from pro ana blogs so I'm here to tell you:

it's okay to eat. being fat is not a bad thing. I am so sorry the world lies to you and that you're I feel like you only have worth if you're skinny. It's not true. you are worthy. you are deserving of nutrition. Yes, even if you're fat. If you're anorexic and fat while reading this, just know, I love you, I love you, I love you.

[neonsfrustrationstation]

If you want to be involved in activism you have to make sure what you're doing is not rooted in self soothing.

if your activism isn't about finding strategic ways to help the communities you want to help, then you're making it about you. Which is also dangerous because you can endanger your movement if you don't know how to regulate your emotions

[neonsfrustrationstation]

i wish dying wasn't painful

[neonsfrustrationstation]

My boss : why'd you take so long in the bathroom?

Me: I was trying to muster up the will to live

[luulapants]

We talk about prison "abolition" and not prison "reform" not because we believe it's possible to create a system where no incarceration is necessary. We say "abolition" because we want to create systems that allow the establishment of a new reparative justice structure, which uses incarceration as little as possible, and which is not a reform of the current incarceration structure, which does not repair or do justice. We do not believe the current structure can be reformed.

Reforming our current incarceration system into a justice system would be like reforming a dog fighting structure into a dog training structure. (And before anyone accuses me of comparing people in prison to dogs - no, I'm not, but I am saying that people who run prisons treat people like dogs.) Dog fighting structures were never designed to train dogs. The people that run them aren't qualified to train dogs for anything but violence (and are incentivized to continue training violence). The incarceration system creates violence and antisocial behavior. It is incentivized to continue doing so. It was never meant to repair social harm.

Prison abolition means, piece by piece, cutting off the supply of bodies to the incarceration structure.

When drug users get medical care instead of being criminalized, prisons are no longer needed to house drug users. When the mentally ill are given medical care instead of being criminalized, prisons are no longer needed to house the mentally ill. When homeless people are given housing instead of being criminalized, prisons are no longer needed to house the homeless. When impoverished people are given welfare and food benefits instead of being criminalized, prisons are no longer needed to house the poor. When youth are given opportunities outside of gangs, prisons have fewer gang members to house. We shrink the system, and we keep shrinking it. Next we create systems to reduce the population of domestic abusers. Next we tackle sexual assault. Every time it shrinks, we look at the remaining population and figure out what population we can tackle next.

That's how prison abolition works.

[skodasforge]

“Respect the experiences of older gay men or die by my sword”

Nobody cares about what cis white men went through when 9/10 they themselves were bigots towards black people at that time. They should have suffered more

“AIDS is divine punishment” but make it woke with a side of forgetting gay men of color exist.

[skodasforge]

I am so fucking serious that some of y’all never unlearned any of your parents bigotry, only the requisite buzzwords to reframe them as progressive

[transcyberism]

especially since gay men of color continue to be disproportionately affected by AIDS due to structural barriers to accessing PrEP, testing, and treatment. people are still dying of it and a large proportion of those people are people of color.

[thefairytaler]

hey, this might be a shot in the dark, but I've seen a few of your posts relating to this topic and I was wondering if you have any book or paper recs that relate to Judaism. (I realise I'm casting a wide net but I am genuinely interested in a lot of topics within it). No worries if not, though. Have a good day!

Hey! Yeah. This is a suuuper wide net, so I’m not sure exactly what you’re after, religious/spiritual texts or more academic/historical stuff? Other?

I have some you can get started with listed below off the top of my head though.

Disclaimer: Just because I list these books doesn’t mean I agree with everything in them. Sometimes reading is about exploring different viewpoints, even ones you don’t agree with. That information is still important and valuable. That said, I am human, and have very clearly and obviously weighted it towards particular topics. ✦ The Torah. Of course. If you grab a version with commentary like Etz Hayim, it’s easier to understand and super interesting. ✦ Mishnah / Talmud. The Mishnah is digestible; the Talmud is huge and full of arguments Rabbis had centuries ago. ✦ Vayoel Moshe by Rabbi Joel Teitelbaum

✦ Judaism as a Civilization by Mordecai M. Kaplan

✦ This Is My God by Herman Wouk

✦ Jews Against Zionism by Thomas A. Kolsky

✦ The Invention of the Jewish People by Shlomo Sand

✦ Judaism Does Not Equal Israel by Marc H. Ellis

✦ An Anti-Zionist Path to Embodied Jewish Healing – Wendy Elisheva Somerson ✦ Citizens of the Whole World: Anti-Zionism and the Cultures of the American Jewish Left – Benjamin Balthaser ✦ If I Am Not For Myself: Journey of an Anti-Zionist Jew – Mike Marqusee ✦ Solidarity Is the Political Version of Love – Rebecca Vilkomerson and Rabbi Alissa Wise

✦ The Founding Myths of Israel by Zeev Sternhell

✦ Colonialism and the Jews edited by Laurence J. Silberstein

✦ The War on Women in Israel: A Story of Religious Radicalism and the Women Fighting for Freedom – Shulamit Sztokman

✦ Jewish Women in Pre-State Israel: Life History, Politics, and Culture – Edited by Esther Hertzog and Hanna Herzog

✦ Jewish Voices in Feminism – Nelly Las

✦ A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism – Yakov M. Rabkin

✦ Rabbi Outcast: Elmer Berger and American Jewish Anti-Zionism – Jack Ross

✦ Jewish Anti-Zionism as Political Theology – Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum, translated/annotated by Shaul Magid

[abettertomorrow]

We could imagine an otherwise analytically confusing situation between an academic mentor, a white man in his 50s, and a graduate student, a working-class man of color in his 20s. The mentor does not use physical or sexual violence, but regularly asks the student for academic labor and then denies him public credit, asks him to share scholarly ideas and then tries to convince the student the ideas are the mentor’s own, and insists the student will not succeed without him. When the student complains, the mentor tells him he is an overly sensitive millennial who does not understand academia. The mentor also informs his colleagues that the student may require a mental health leave of absence. The student is left feeling confused about his own ideas and about the boundaries of intellectual sharing. He feels isolated from potential allies, fearing that rumors about his mental health may hurt his career. Nothing particularly documentable has occurred, but the student feels isolated, confused, and diminished—powerless and controlled in an important relationship. A context of unreality has been created for him, in a power-laden intimate relationship, that exploits his institutional vulnerabilities. Like many abusers in this study, the mentor likely has no conscious intention of “gaslighting” the student.

Using the theoretical framework outlined in this article, we can better understand this situation. The relationship is power-unequal and takes place in a steeply hierarchical setting. The student’s career status is a clear vulnerability, used to establish power and discredit the student’s complaints. Unlike in cases of domestic violence, the hierarchical institutional setting in a mentor–mentee relationship is likely more salient than is gender. Still, the gender of the mentor matters, and he associates the student with feminized irrationality: the mentor is the holder of (masculine) reason, and the student is constructed as unreasonable and unknowledgeable. The mentor accuses the student of irrationality and lack of know-how, feminizing and discrediting him. The student is labeled “overly sensitive” because of age and ignorant of academia, potentially because of race and class. The student experiences “surreality” because this takes place in a power relationship and maybe this is just how mentor relationships are supposed to work. Finally, these gaslighting strategies become public when the mentor constructs the student as “crazy” to colleagues.

Using the theoretical framework outlined here, we can avoid calling this just a “bad” interpersonal situation. Instead, we can analyze how gaslighting dynamics are made possible and effective due to gender-based stereotypes, intersecting inequalities, and institutional vulnerabilities. The context of a hierarchical institutional setting is especially critical in this case. Gender is still relevant to the construction of rationality here, although less so as an individual-level variable. Overall, gaslighting mobilizes and worsens the power inequalities already present in the relationship and in the institutional setting.

The Sociology of Gaslighting by Paige L. Sweet

[crixxxtina]

#some caveats here: this article says 'male bodied' and 'female bodied' which is incredibly frustrating#unsurprisingly it overdetermines a rudimentary understanding of gendered power#'feminizing' here could probably just as well be placed by 'infantilizing' especially given the explicit age dynamic in this example#there is a lot more you could say about this beyond what this author does but it's a very good start

[neonsfrustrationstation]

people can be so disingenuous when telling people with EDs that they want them to heal. It's only when the person is anorexic AND skinny that they have sympathy, and they only want people to heal if they stay skinny.

When I started eating again during my ED recovery, I started gaining weight and holding onto it because my body was likely terrified of going without food for so long again.

And guess what? A lot of people in my life talked negatively about my weight gain either to my face or behind my back. People who *knew* that I had been starving myself. They claimed it was about my health, but I know now that it was fatphobia. It was much healthier for me to be eating 3 meals a day than starving myself 90% of the time, but they just saw that I had gone from skinny to fat, and to them, the fat was worse than the malnutrition.

I'm fat now, and much better off. No one who had bad things to say stayed in my life. And I'm better for it. But I worry about fat people with ED's who don't have the support I had. I worry about people who are ready to heal but the shaming from outside sources keep them in their illness or push them back in if they started to heal.

being fat is not a bad thing

[neonsfrustrationstation]

my heart breaks when I see how many pro-ana blogs reblog this post. You all deserve so much better. It's okay to be fat. I hope one day you all can lovingly hold your round soft bellies and understand that you are worth the world. Being fat brings me joy. I used to be obsessed with being skinny. I used to be bone deep terrified of gaining weight. I'm not anymore. I love my fat belly. There is hope for you.

This goes double if you're anorexic and fat. You deserve to love your body and to nourish it. I know you have people in your life who tear you down about your weight and it reinforces your eating disorder. I know this. I hope my words reach you and plant a seed inside your heart. You don't need to make yourself small. Your size is beautiful. You are beautiful. I don't care what you look like, how many "flaws" you see when you look in the mirror. You are worth everything.

[zorotlekuykauo]

jesus fucking christ

[obedientlyviolentshepherd]

[pro-prin-prinny]

[First Image ID: A screenshot with a water filter over it of someone else's text post. The text post reads "I keep seeing this around, especially now around Yom HaShoah, and it's starting to piss me off, "Never again means never again for anyone." NO THE FUCK IT DOES NOT." /.End ID]

[Second Image ID: A screenshot of someone's reply made in the tags. It reads "There's actually a whole (academic) article about this. How in Israel the phrase is generally understood to mean 'never again the victims' whereas in diaspora it's understood to mean 'never again for anyone' and how the phrase was PROBABLY coined by anarchist communists who specifically meant like 'dismantle the systems (like nationalism) that led to this in the first place'. IDK if this person is Israeli but it's usually Israelis you see responding like this and it's because they straight up have no idea the rest of the world doesn't see it like that. Combined w the at this point pretty infamous disdain for Holocaust victims and survivors for being 'weak'. It doesn't mean 'in your honour we will never let this happen again to anyone else' it literally means we will never again be like YOU who failed to protect yourself. Edit ppl sharing these tags feel free to do so without attribution. I'm not really keen to engage with teh people who will be angry abotu this. /.End ID]

[pro-prin-prinny]

@jewishvitya if you do not want to get involved feel free to ignore this @ but I wanted to confirm with you that this is an interpretation held by Israelis. Personally I've only heard "never again" as a blanket statement for "never again letting genocide happen to anyone."

[jewishvitya-movingblogs]

Yeah, that's true, in Israel "never again" means we'll never allow ourselves to be victims again. That's how I understood it for us growing up.

We're aware of the different interpretation worldwide. But we don't trust other nations to protect us from another genocide, so I saw it more as an expression of guilt than a promise I can rely on. There's a level of... scoffing at this other interpretation and seeing it as a bastardized version of the promise we made to ourselves. "You don't mean it, you don't actually care, you just want to feel better about yourselves."

And this might be something to keep in mind. We don't trust gentiles. So any demand from Israel to stop oppressing Palestinians is taken as... you felt bad for us as long as we were victims, you like us when you can tell romanticized holocaust stories about how all we did was be murdered, but once we can protect ourselves, you hate us again. "They're so antisemitic they can't stand seeing a Jew being strong, they want us to roll over and be murdered." So many Israelis aren't even trying for... good PR. Because they believe that the only way to look good to a world that hates us is to die.

When other countries stand against Israel, the response is that we always knew we were alone and universally hated. So that's another reason to be patriotic and defend the existence of this country. Because no one else will protect us. That's why you see Israelis doubling down rather than seeing how wrong we are.

The disdain towards holocaust victims doesn't show anymore when we talk about this, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's part of the history of the meaning. Holocaust victims were seen as weak in early Zionism. To the point that survivors were mistreated.

If you see grains of truth in any of this, it's because these attitudes make use of very real antisemitism to lead us to these conclusions. Other countries are not doing enough to protect Jews and combat antisemitism. So it's easy to look at that and say "see? We can never trust them."

(Disclaimer in case this reaches someone who doesn't know me. I'm anti-Zionist, I'm explaining a mentality I don't agree with. I'm not making these arguments as if they're correct, I'm laying them out to show them.)

[changeling-of-night]

Yeah, while not Israeli, I was very much raised in a zionist mindset, which heavily involved the idea that someday we would NEED to run to Israel. And I was pretty heavily raised with all of these ideas, with a complete fear and suspicion to any gentiles to the point where I knew I wasn't supposed to trust a single gentile opinion on anything Jewish, because they were obviously just using it to control us into assimilation, or drive us out, survival optional.

I only recognized how dangerous that was from other Jews, and even then only because I was constantly uncomfortable with listening to the concept of a "self hating Jew" as the only explanation for why they disagree with Zionism. I need a reason, even when my entire being disagrees with someone, I need to understand why.

Without that mentality, the real oppression in the background of zionist thinking, makes it so easy to just spiral out into monstrosity. People really do hate us, and really do condemn legitimate self defense. So if there isn't the self awareness that fascism isn't a unique ideology of "bad people", that anyone can be prone to being swayed by fascist thinking even if they've been victims of it, the legitimate terror and still-present discrimination makes a fantastic barrier to lock yourself in an echo chamber where you dismiss those who say you're hurting them as not one of you, and thus lying.

[jewishvitya-movingblogs]

This last paragraph is great, thank you for that.

[bringmemyrocks]

Important (no alt text bc phone, feel free to add) removed the posters name but they're welcome to respond ofc.

So many Zionists think the only other option to what they're doing now is death. In 1967, a war which Israel won and knew it would win, Israelis were preparing large fields for Israeli burials bc they thought they would be killed en masse. Sorry for linking TOI here but this quote os relevant and it's hard to find for free online from a better source. Quote partway down the page "During the Six-Day War, Israelis prepared for their demise, following the ways of our perpetrators from World War II, digging mass graves just in case of catastrophe as well as producing atomic weapons."

In reality, Israel was not at risk and Israel in fact used this war as a reason to expand further settlements and commit the Naksa, the expulsion of a further 300,000 Palestinians. Egypt had no means of destroying Israel in 1967 just as Palestine has no means of doing that now. But that's not what Zionists teach their children. They hear Israel was almost destroyed in 1967, and that Israel did what was necessary to "defend itself."

If you're brought up in constant fear of annihilation (no matter how unfounded), both of yourself and your community (worldwide Jewry etc.) It's easy to fall into fascism. And if you're taught that anyone who disagrees with you wants you dead (whether they're part of your in-group or not), you won't be reasoned with.

[bringmemyrocks]

Bringing this back because I've seen a lot of well-meaning posts genuinely asking

"Why do Zionists team up with antisemitic right-wingers? Don't they know that Zionists mistreated Holocaust survivors and are currently doing a genocide?"

"Have Zionists seen the genocidal screeds that Herzl and Jabotinsky wrote? How can they possibly support such a morally bankrupt ideology?"

"Don't they know that Eric Adams teams up with Christian antisemites and John Hagee only cares about Israel because he thinks it will make Jesus come back?"

And the answer is that nothing compares to the fear of annihilation. If someone has been so strongly indoctrinated to the point that they think that Zohran Mamdani and students at Columbia want another Holocaust, no amount of posting Jabotinsky's writings or hand-wringing about Christian Zionists will convince them otherwise. Some liberal Zionists genuinely hate what Jabotinsky wrote, but just as many are well-aware and don't care. Jabontinsky's racism was a small price to pay for what Zionists see as the only way to ensure Jewish survival.

The right-wingers like John Hagee support Israel, and if someone believes that Israel is the only key to Jewish survival, they don't care that he's an antisemite. Hagee thinks the Jews killed Jesus and thinks all Jews will be killed when Jesus returns? So what, let the goyim believe whatever they want, we need to guarantee that Jews will survive another generation. (Dangerously close to the 14 words, I know.)

Viktor Orban supports Israel, so he supports Jewish survival. He dislikes Jews? The fact that he's an antisemite doesn't matter, because for Zionists, Israel is the ultimate solution to antisemitism. Hold your nose and support him, because unlike those paying false lip service about racial and religious equality, Orban will ensure Jewish survival. Even if it's for his own ends, even if he wants to kill all the Jews in his own country. Those Jews can flee to Israel. Nothing else matters.

Zohran Mamdani supports all religious minorities in NYC including Jews, but to someone who's been brainwashed to think another Holocaust is around the corner and all Jews will need to flee to occupied Palestine, that doesn't matter. Either Mamdani knows and supports Palestine because he wants another Holocaust, or he's so deluded that he thinks he's helping the Jews but is going to get them all killed anyway.

The past 100 years have proven that setting up a Jewish ethnostate only makes Jews everywhere less safe, but fear of the idea of certain death drowns out common sense. It drowns out the millions of pictures of dead children. It drowns out the fact that Israel is doing another Holocaust in view of the entire world.

The Jewish students crying "they want to kill us" when their classmates wear keffiyehs and stage peaceful protests are being 100% honest to their understanding of reality. (Watch Israelism for free here.)

Yes it's racist. Yes it's evil. Yes it's genocidal. No you don't have to sympathize with it one iota. But if you're genuinely wondering how it's possible and why Zionists online are bending over backward to justify their incoherent ideology, this is why.

[bringmemyrocks]

#FUCKKKKKKKK

#How are we supposed to combat that?

#Still needs to be shared because like. I didn't see it this way until I read the above post

#But FUCKING HELL. We can't convince them they're wrong because THEY'RE NOT. So what CAN we do to stop them wiping out the Palestinians?

#PROVE THEIR FEARS ARE JUSTIFIED?

#I don't want that to be our ownly damn option!

I have a few thoughts on this and others please weigh in as my perspective is limited to my own life experience. I assume your tags refer to Jewish Zionists, so that is how I will approach it. None of these are guaranteed to work, but everything I link is free and most are from Zionist sources.

I know several Zionists whose worldviews were shaken by learning about how Jerusalem's Morrocan quarter was destroyed to make room for the plaza in front of the Western Wall. Getting Zionists to realize that Zionist-led expulsions did in fact happen, and happen in the name of Judaism, is key. Many have internalized the lie that the Nakba was voluntary, but this smaller expulsion and the fact that they were lied to about it is harder for their brains to fight. Israel is willing to lie to them, what else is it lying about? Link.

Zionist antisemitism, see how Herzl actually spoke of Jews. "The Yid, on the other hand, is a hideous distortion of the human character, something unspeakably low and repulsive...The Yid is the curse of the Jews." See also his diaries, I know multiple people who have become anti-Zionist after actually reading Herzl.

Herzl's very explicitly colonialist writings (for those who would deny it.) "We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country."

Jabotinsky's genocidal writings (helpful for ppl who haven't rationalized it already) In his own words from his own institute: "Every native population, civilised or not, regards its lands as its national home, of which it is the sole master, and it wants to retain that mastery always; it will refuse to admit not only new masters but, even new partners or collaborators."

Demonstrate that Zionism/Zionism unchecked makes Jews less safe, especially in occupied Palestine. Example: Peter Beinart/other liberal zionists who are willing to admit that October 7 happened as a consequence of ongoing oppression of Palestinians. Extra helpful if they are willing to admit that one of October 7's main goals was to free Palestinians held in Israeli prisons (many without charge or trial.) That shows both that October 7 was not some senseless unplanned act and that it could have been avoided had Israel actually been a state with equality for all.

This op-ed detailing how the post-67 occupation fuels antisemitism.

I know Shaul Magid has written a decent amount about this also but I'm not super familiar.

Risky, but: show that Israel's violence against Palestinians has made worldwide Jewry less safe since the early 20th century. Zionists like to use the example of the Farhud where Jews were driven from Iraq in 1950 as an example of "Jews aren't safe anywhere" but neglect to mention that Jews lived very safety in Iraq for millennia before. The fact is that Israel played a role and actually encouraged Iraq's expulsions. Source, also read Avi Shlaim's Three Worlds. Not a justification of course, but a demonstration of Israel not making Jews safe.

Demonstrate that Islamic countries have not, in fact, expelled all their Jews. Iran is a good example because Zionists see the regime as basically al-Qaeda and this can make them think. Many many Zionist Jews falsely believe there are no Jews left in Iran. Alex Shams has written some intro-level stuff but determine for yourself if it's too rad for the ppl you're dealing with.

Also risky, but show that the ADL's count of "hate crimes" is overinflated by several orders of magnitude. They currently count basically all criticism of Israel as an "antisemitic hate crime." This also makes people take legitimate accusations of antisemitism less seriously, thus making Jews less safe.

Jews in general including Israelis feel that Israel is not actually a safe haven anymore. Even Zionist papers like the Times of Israel and the Forward admit this.

Palestinians with Israeli citizenship ("Arab Israelis") aren't defended by the Iron Dome and don't have bomb shelters (so Israel isn't safe/not equal treatment) Listed these ones bc liberal Zionists like to claim Bedouin communities as "Arab Israelis that Israel treats equally"

ID system graphic showing inequality of access

Mistreatment of Holocaust survivors in a state that supposedly needed founding specifically for them and their descendants.

Separating Yemini Jewish children from their mothers despite claiming to be a refuge for Jews who were expelled from their countries. Most liberal Zionists think that the "60's Scoop" of indigenous children was wrong. So this is wrong also.

Forced sterilization of Ethiopian Jewish women for the same reason, another instance of serious racism--these Ethiopian women were not "safe" in Israel.

Please add anything you think others might find helpful.

[doberbutts]

We remember you zionist

only on tumblr will you be labeled both a zionist and a hamas supporter for rhe same moral viewpoint of: war bad, genocide bad, stop killing civilians and start rebuilding for those who are left.

[senhor-do-escuro]

Absolutely. But "bothsidism" and playing "neutral" is not the way to go.

The only way for justice to be prevail is: "Israel" ceases to exist and the land is returned to their rightful owners, the palestinians.

[doberbutts]

I have- for years- been fairly critical of the actions of the Israeli government and military, as well as my own country's involvement with the conflict. Since I learned about it in high school approximately 20 years ago. It's weird that that's considered neutrality or bothsidesism.

"Stop exploding schools and hospitals" and "civilians don't deserve to die for the actions of their government" is probably the most basic form of anti-war political theory you can get. I don't think Palestinians just going to school or work or a social visit with their neighbors deserve to be killed. I also just happen to think that Israelis just going to a concert also don't deserve to be killed. That's not "playing neutral", that's being consistently anti war even when I think Palestinians have had the shit end of the stick regarding this conflict since it started. I also don't think Palestinians deserve to be rounded up, starved, shot, exploded, or subjected to chemical warfare because of it. I do- again- think that collective punishment is a war crime as defined by the Geneva Convention, and I don't think anyone *deserves* to die in the ways civilians usually die in war. I don't care what country said civilian is from. I'm not the world's biggest fan of countries or borders.

I'm also hideously tired of the US's involvement in war, having been actively at war for most of my life and manipulating world politics to make more wars for the rest. If we stop supplying military aid and funding to Israel, they will stop being able to enact such warfare on Palestine. Personally I'd like to cut military funding in the US in general because I'm tired of my tax dollars going to the war machine and I would rather them go to things like free education and healthcare instead of blowing up Syrian kids. Israel is just one of many countries the US is involved in that it shouldn't be.

However, I cannot help but be caught by the "rightful owners" comment. This sort of thinking is very dangerous for a number of reasons, but also I am wondering. Where do you think Jews came from, if not Judea? Why is their "right" to the land considered lesser? Why is their indigenity not also a weighed factor? What gives you the right to decide that they do not also belong there?

[senhor-do-escuro]

It's not a question of "lesser" or "more indigenous" . Jews already lived in Palestine way before "Israel". Palestinian jews literally exist. No one forbides Jews from coming to Palestine.

But you also can't ignore that a lot of "Israelis" are literally a bunch of americans, europeans, brazilians, people who just converted into judaism last year and suddenly they are "granted the right" to own a land they have never been before. While palestinians who have lived there for literal centuries can't.

Criticize the government is all good. How about the settlers we see mocking palestinians's deaths on TikTok? How about the settlers who block and destroy aid for starving palestinians? How about the ones who watch and cheer for every bomb dropped in Gaza like it is fireworks? What do you say about them? What about the ones who literally protest for their "right to rape palestinians"?

You are "bothsiding" because you treat palestinians and settlers as if they were the same. Settlers are not "ignorant and innocent civilians", the vast majority of them are people who are fully aware on what they are contributing to.

[doberbutts]

I feel the same about the Israelis doing so as I do about my own countrymen who also cheer for fascist, militaristic, xenophobic, racist, and frankly horrific actions taken by our own government and military. And I still do not want my country's schools and hospitals blown up while recognizing that my own country has its ugliness to work out.

You are repeating a lot of antisemitic talking points. I'm not interested in being antisemitic.

[senhor-do-escuro]

For example?🤨

[doberbutts]

The fact that you tagged this "zionazi" as you asked how you're being antisemitic is beyond parody, to be completely honest.

Anyway. Jasper Doberbutts still just as anti-war and pro-peace as I was yesterday, which seems to make everyone really mad for whatever reason.

[doberbutts]

I do want to point out that they posted this and then blocked me, but the answer is easily seen in the original answer to this ask.

My great idea is that the Israeli government and military stops killing Palestinians. The border opens. Peace is made. Those in charge of the horrific violence and those enforcing the decisions made are removed from power and judged in a world court. Reparations and rebuilding efforts are in full swing, equal representation in government and blended communities and the valuing of both Arab and Jewish culture takes place. Children are raised alongside each other and adults learn how to co-habitate with their neighbors. This is a land they both have been part of for millennium. So why can't they still both be part of it, this time peacefully?

Justice does need to happen. I'm not a big fan of revenge being dressed up as justice.

I don't think that's a particularly nazi-adjacent or even nazi-similar mindset. I think it's flat out offensive to even consider the comparison.

[thefairytaler]

I saw a post earlier, I will not be appending my response to that post to the post itself, but I did want to touch upon it.

The post was about how trans men and transmasculine people afab don't have any media tropes that are, we'll say, problematic for them, the way that the 'funny man in a dress' trope is trans-misogynistic, I wanted to discuss that and lay that claim to rest.

Below I will be discussing some tropes in media that affect trans masculine people afab. Some may be worse than others, some accidental, some maybe on purpose, but I've compiled them because I think it's important to understand that just how the harmful tropes aimed at masculine people afab do exist, they just differ in their execution.

DISCLAIMER: If I have worded anything poorly in this post please tolerate it, English is my fourth language and it can be overwhelming to attempt linguistic perfection or the performance of it for native English Speaker.

EDIT: tumblr really messed my layout and formatting up, sorry for that but I'm not fixing it unless I really need to.

1. “Tomboy Gets a Makeover” = Suddenly She’s Worth Something (AKA: Now She’s Fuckable)

This one’s everywhere. You’ve got a character who’s rough around the edges, usually wears hoodies, maybe doesn’t shave, maybe doesn’t even care what people think. And the story punishes her for that. Until someone (usually a fairy godmother or mean girl turned ally) shoves her into a dress, puts some gloss on her lips, straightens her hair...

and then she’s finally seen as beautiful, desirable, and valid.

The core message? Your masculinity is temporary, and your value doesn’t actually exist until you conform to traditional femininity. You weren’t lovable, datable, or even visible until you softened up and got pretty.

This trope tells young people AFAB:

You're not enough unless you perform femininity

Your gender nonconformity is a flaw to fix

If you're not seen as sexy in the "right" way, you're invisible

And this sticks. Especially for transmascs, who grew up seeing their natural instincts or styles treated like a before picture.

Examples:

The Princess Diaries – Mia goes from “invisible frizzy nerd” to prom-queen level once her hair is flat and her legs are waxed.

A Cinderella Story – Sam’s baggy clothes are treated like a shield for her insecurity, until she shows up in a dress and suddenly earns male attention.

The Breakfast Club – Allison is artsy and weird and quietly masc... until she’s quite literally pink-washed and given a makeover so she can be datable.

She's All That – Laney is cool and self-possessed in her own way, but the movie waits until she’s in a red dress and contacts to take her seriously.

Meteor Garden – Shan Cai’s toughness is tolerable, but she’s still only framed as truly “lovable” after being softened through male attention.

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

2. “She Pretended to Be a Boy” = She’s a Lying Snake Whore

When characters AFAB dress or live as boys, it’s almost always framed as deception. Not survival. Not autonomy. Not self-expression. Just trickery. There’s a dramatic “reveal” scene where everyone suddenly feels betrayed, like the character has been scheming the whole time instead of just…

living. Sound familiar?

This isn’t just about fiction. It directly echoes how transmasc people are treated in reality, as liars, as fake men, as threats to those around them just by existing. The idea that someone AFAB could be masculine, or just a guy, is treated like a trap set for unsuspecting cis people.

The underlying message:

You can’t be trusted if you present as masculine

Your gender is a mask, a trick, a crime

If people liked you before, they were duped

it’s the same logic used to justify violence and exclusion towards Transmasculine people AFAB in reality.

Examples:

She’s the Man – Viola pretends to be her brother to play soccer, but it’s all “uh-oh she has boobs” humor. Her gender presentation is the punchline.

The King’s Affection – She lives as the crown prince and does a damn good job, but the tension constantly hinges on whether she’s tricking people by being there at all. Masculinity is okay only if it’s secret and painful.

Coffee Prince – Go Eun-chan presents as male to get a job, and instead of critiquing the system that forces her to do it, the narrative focuses on her guilt and “the reveal.” Masculinity is tolerated, but never fully respected.

Victor/Victoria – Gender is treated as a clever disguise. The moment someone finds out “the truth,” it’s all shock, betrayal, and drama. Queerness framed as a con.

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

3. “It’s Just a Phase” = You’ll Be a Real Girl™️ Eventually

You can be a tomboy for now. Run around, get messy, be loud. It’s even kind of cute! As a little kid who needs to grow up. Then suddenly, your masculinity isn’t just childish! it’s a problem. Something to “grow out of.” Something to fix!

This trope trains audiences to see AFAB masculinity as:

Immature

A quirk of childhood

A stepping stone to real femininity

And what does “real girlhood” mean in this context? Dresses. Lip gloss. Boys. The implication is that your value kicks in when you start performing the kind of femininity that makes you palatable and desirable. You were allowed to be wild for a minute, but only if you clean up nice later.

It reinforces the same tired message: Girlhood = destination, not a choice. Masculinity is just the wrong stop on the way. If you are Transmasculine AFAB, you are a child who should grow up, immature, being treated as much younger than they are is a huge issue with transmasculine people AFAB.

I would like to add that this is also a misogynistic trope, but misogyny intersects with transandrophobia in ways that are valid to talk about.

Examples:

The Parent Trap – Annie and Hallie are opposites, but Hallie (tomboy-coded) only really “settles down” and softens once she’s back with her mom. Her rougher edge is charming but temporary.

Now and Then – Roberta is the tomboy of the group, and her Big Moment of Growth™ comes when she puts on a dress. Not solving childhood trauma. Not emotional healing. The dress.

Boys Over Flowers – Jan-di is scrappy, resilient, athletic! and then she falls for the male lead and gradually loses every bit of that fire. By the end, she’s quiet, deferential, and soft. like that’s her natural arc.

Hi My Sweetheart– Rainie Yang’s character starts out masc-presenting and bold. She’s mocked, corrected, and eventually “fixed” into a soft, pink, cutesy girl. Her makeover isn’t for her. it’s the narrative giving her permission to be “dateable.”

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

5. “One of the Boys” But Never Really One of the Boys

She’s tough. She’s cool. She fights. She hangs with the guys. She might even burp. But make no mistake! she’s never actually allowed to be one. This trope gives characters AFAB just enough masculinity to seem "interesting," then punishes them if they go too far with it.

Again, this is also a misogynistic trope, but the intersectionality here is important even in the ones that don't seem obvious, some people will poke fun at me putting Natasha here for example, but if you do that you're misunderstanding my intent and I do not care for it.

I am not saying ANY of these characters are coded transmasculine, I am discussing how masculinity is treated in regards to characters AFAB.

The message is clear: You can borrow masculinity, but don’t get comfortable in it.

These characters:

Get constant reminders that they're different

Are sexualized, softened, or sidelined the moment they get too close to “boyish”

Exist to complement the boys, not compete with them

Examples:

Avengers – Natasha Romanoff is deadly, competent, cool under pressure, but also constantly shoved into the “team mom” or “sexy redhead with feelings” role. Her backstory centers around forced sterilization, and her arc in Age of Ultron literally says she’s a “monster” for not being able to have kids. Tell me again how she’s treated like “one of the guys.”

How to Train Your Dragon – Astrid starts out as the alpha fighter, but as soon as Hiccup grows up, she becomes a background girlfriend with no arc of her own. Her sharp edge gets smoothed into supportiveness.

My Hero Academia – Nearly every tough AFAB character gets undercut. Mirko is badass but exists on the fringes. Jirou gets development, but only as support. Bakugo’s mom is comic relief. Meanwhile, male characters are allowed complex, messy, powerful arcs without ever needing to "soften" for the audience.

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

“AFAB Character Learns to Embrace Womanhood” = Moral Victory!

You start with a tough, scrappy, masculine-coded person AFAB, maybe she fights, maybe she’s emotionally shut down, maybe she just doesn’t want to be like other girls. It doesn't matter, this is how it ends:

She softens. She submits. She “grows” by becoming a wife, a mom, a love interest, a Real Girl™️.

This isn’t healing. It’s containment. The message is: your rebellion was cute, but it’s time to settle down and accept the role assigned to you.

“Growth” = compliance. “Strength” = giving it up. “Maturity” = pink, dresses, and a baby carriage.

Examples:

The Hunger Games – Katniss Everdeen is trauma-coded, masc-leaning, and uncomfortable with romance or traditional femininity. So what’s her ending? A baby epilogue where she’s in a dress, quietly settled into nuclear family life. Is she happy about it? No, but there's no denying that this is her ending.

Mulan II– In the original, she challenges gender roles and becomes a literal war hero. In the sequel? The plot revolves around her needing to prove she can still be soft, feminine, and wife-material. Her masculinity is not allowed to just exist.

Jojo Rabbit – Rosie (the mother) is framed as the ideal woman: warm, loving, feminine. Meanwhile, Elsa (a girl in hiding) starts out guarded and hard-edged, but only becomes “redeemed” once she softens and embraces traditional femininity.

A Silent Voice / Koe no Katachi – The narrative constantly punishes her for not being “nice enough,” and her arc only begins to shift once she becomes more demure and apologetic. She cannot be both a good person and brash or hotheaded, submit or be branded evil.

Inuyasha – Sango is introduced as a demon-slaying warrior. But her story ends in the most vanilla way possible: marriage, motherhood, and sidelining. She loses her edge completely. I hate the end of Inuyasha so much it is borderline a meme in my circles.

Fruits Basket - Uotani is tall, tomboyish, and used to be in a girl gang. She has strength, history, and depth. And then her “big growth moment”? Realizing she wants to be softer and more ladylike, because femininity is treated as the finish line within the story.

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

“Masculine Presentation” = Joke Costume or Moral Failure

When characters AFAB wear suits, cut their hair short, or pass as masc in any way, media rarely lets it land without a laugh track, or a moral consequence.

Masculine presentation is treated as:

A silly costume

A failed experiment

A sign of monstrosity

Or something to be shamed out of.

The story makes sure you feel embarrassed for them. It invites the audience to laugh, cringe, or judge, because “girl in boy clothes” is still a punchline in mainstream media. Just like 'Boy in girl clothes' is.

And yes, this hurts trans women, but it also absolutely targets butch, GNC, and transmasc folks. Masculinity is marked as wrong on AFAB bodies, funny if temporary, disgusting if permanent.

Examples:

Scooby-Doo – Velma’s masc coding (short hair, flat clothes, practical shoes) constantly becomes the joke. If she dresses even more masc? She’s “mistaken” for a man and ridiculed. Her queerness and presentation are treated like a quirk at best, a problem at worst.

The Suite Life of Zack and Cody – London Tipton wears a single masc outfit and the laugh track explodes. The outfit itself isn’t weird, but the show acts like the sight of her in anything non-feminine is a cosmic-level joke.

Friends – Rachel and Monica wear tuxedos in one episode, and the joke is entirely that it looks “wrong.” Chandler mocks them, the camera lingers on how “awkward” they look.

iCarly – Sam dresses masc semi-regularly, and is constantly mocked for acting “like a guy.” In interviews, actress Jennette McCurdy has said this ongoing joke contributed directly to her eating disorder relapse. This is not harmless.

Matilda - Miss Trunchbull is heavily masc-coded: big build, short hair, no makeup, harsh voice. She’s a literal villain, and her appearance is meant to be scary. Her masculinity is associated directly with her monstrosity.

Aikatsu! – Girls in suits are used as performance shock value. “Omg, a girl in a tuxedo??” is the whole joke.

✦•······················•✦•······················•✦

IN CLOSING.

These tropes don’t exist in a vacuum.

they shape how people see us, and how we see ourselves.

When characters AFAB exploring masculinity are only ever jokes, villains, phases, or tragedies, it sends a message: You don’t get to be this. You’re only allowed to visit. And when you're done, you better come back “correct.”

But we’re not punchlines. We’re not broken girls. Some of us are boys.

Some of us are neither.

Some of us are just butch as hell and happy about it.

We deserve stories where we aren’t corrected. Where masculinity on AFAB people isn’t a phase, a disguise, or a joke. But our lives, and the truth of them.